Software testing optimizer

ABSTRACT

In an approach for testing software, a computer receives a series of two or more revisions to a set of software code. The computer identifies modifications between the series of two or more revisions. The computer categorizes the series of two or more revisions into one or more categories of revisions based on the identified modifications. The computer tests at least one of the series of two or more revisions from at least one of the one or more categories of revisions.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to the field of softwaredevelopment, and more particularly to software testing.

Software is developed for a variety of purposes, typically to meetclient requirements, a perceived need, or for personal use. Softwaredevelopment generally employs one of two different software developmentmethodologies, either a software development life cycle or an agilemethodology to create software through the development of source code(i.e., a collection of computer instructions written in a computerlanguage specifying actions to be performed by a computer device toachieve requirements). The life cycle methodology develops softwarethrough a detailed plan describing the development, maintenance andreplacement of software at distinct phases, such as in a waterfall,spiral, or incremental development plan. The agile methodology developssoftware through a process of incremental iterations, where design,construction, and development may occur simultaneously, such as incontinuous integration, rapid application development, and adaptivesoftware development. For example, modifications to software areincorporated as updates are made, allowing for continuous improvementwith rapid and flexible responses to modification.

Continuous integration, as well as other types of agile softwaredevelopment, employ an aspect of software configuration managementreferred to as revision control (e.g., may also be referred to as sourcecontrol or version control). Revision control may be implemented througha centralized repository where the source code used to build a specificapplication or component (e.g., also referred to as the code base) isstored for management and tracking. When computer programmers modifysource code under revision control, the latest source code is firstretrieved from revision control (e.g., checking out the source code as aworking copy). Modifications may then be made to the working copy of thesource code but do not take effect until the working copy is checked inor committed back into the central repository. Once the working copy ofthe source code is committed, revision control manages and tracks themodifications to the committed source code by assigning a uniqueidentifier.

The assignment of the unique identifier to the newly committed sourcecode creates a new revision (e.g., may assign a revision level throughlettering, numbers, date, etc.), thus enabling multiple revisions ofsimilar source code to be kept (e.g., previous revisions of the sourcecode without current revision modifications incorporated are kept).Revision control then recognizes the most recently committed source codeas the latest revision from which subsequent modifications will be made.At any point after modifications are committed, software testing may beperformed to verify requirements (e.g., test cases for functionality)and to aid in eliminating unforeseen errors (e.g., structure, syntax,dataflow) that may have been incorporated by the modification to thesource code. When failures result, additional software testing isperformed to identify the source of the error.

SUMMARY

Aspects of the present invention, disclose a method, computer programproduct, and system for testing software. The method includes one ormore computer processors receiving a series of two or more revisions toa set of software code. The method further includes one or more computerprocessors identifying modifications between the series of two or morerevisions. The method further includes one or more computer processors,categorizing the series of two or more revisions into one or morecategories of revisions based on the identified modifications. Themethod further includes one or more computer processors testing at leastone of the series of two or more revisions from at least one of the oneor more categories of revisions.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram illustrating a software developmentenvironment, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 2 is a flowchart depicting operational steps of a software testingoptimization program, on a server within the software developmentenvironment of FIG. 1, for optimizing the testing of continuousintegration software, and to rapidly identify the source of a failure inthe software, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 3A is an example depiction of the identification of critical andtrivial revisions, and selection of a sample space of trivial revisionswhen a failure occurs, in accordance with an embodiment of the presentinvention;

FIG. 3B is an example depiction of the selection of the middle trivialrevision within the sample space defined by a critical revision pass andfailure;

FIG. 3C is an example depiction of redefining the sample space andselecting the next middle trivial revision for testing after a failureof the initial middle trivial revision;

FIG. 3D is an example depiction of redefine the sample space andselecting the next middle trivial revision for testing after a passingstatus of the middle trivial revision;

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of components of the server computer executingthe software testing optimization program, in accordance with anembodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Software developed through either life cycle or agile developmentmethodologies utilizes considerable time and resources to performsoftware testing. In continuous integration, the time and resourcesassociated with software testing increase exponentially, as softwaretesting may be performed whenever a new revision of software is enteredinto revision control. The software testing strategies currentlyutilized with continuous integration do not consider characteristics ofthe software modifications, and follow either sequential or paralleltesting approaches when performing software testing. Additionally, asfailures are encountered, the associated follow on software testingeffort is further compounded as the source of the failure must belocated and corrected prior to initiating a new iteration of softwaretesting. Embodiments of the present invention recognize that softwaretesting performed without providing consideration to the magnitude andcomplexity of the software modifications, and proceeding sequentially orin parallel is inefficient. Additionally, embodiments of this inventionprovide a systematic approach to determine the source of an error withina continuous integration environment, eliminating unnecessary softwaretesting.

The present invention will now be described in detail with reference tothe Figures. FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram illustrating asoftware development environment, generally designated 100, inaccordance with one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 1 providesonly an illustration of one embodiment and does not imply anylimitations with regard to the environments in which differentembodiments may be implemented.

In the depicted embodiment, software development environment 100includes client device 110 and server 120 interconnected over network130. Software development environment 100 may include additionalcomputing devices, mobile computing devices, servers, computers, storagedevices, or other devices not shown.

Client device 110 may be an electronic device or computing system,capable of executing machine readable program instructions and receivingand sending data. In various embodiments, client device 110 may be alaptop computer, a tablet computer, a netbook computer, a personalcomputer (PC), a desktop computer, a personal digital assistant (PDA), asmart phone, or any programmable electronic device capable ofcommunicating with another computing device via network 130. In otherembodiments, client device 110 may represent a computing systemutilizing multiple computers and components acting collectively toperform a task when accessed through network 130, as is common in datacenters and with cloud computing applications. Client device 110includes application software 112 and user interface 114.

Application software 112 is a set of one or more programs referred to assoftware development tools (e.g., source code editor, compiler, revisioncontrol, test software, etc.). Application software 112 encompasses thenecessary programs to create, test, maintain, and support thedevelopment of software (e.g., base source code 122 and revised basesource code 124). Application software 112 provides user interface 114with an interface to base source code 122, revised base source code 124,and software testing optimization program 200 (stored on server 120). Inthe depicted embodiment, application software 112 resides on clientdevice 110. In other embodiments, application software 112 may reside onother devices, such as server 120, provided that application software112 is accessible to user interface 114, and has access to base sourcecode 122 and software testing optimization program 200.

User interface 114 is a program that provides an interface between auser of client device 110 and a plurality of applications includingapplication software 112, which resides on client device 110 and/or maybe accessed over network 130. A user interface, such as user interface114, refers to the information (e.g., graphic, text, sound) that aprogram presents to a user and the control sequences the user employs tocontrol and interact with the program. A variety of types of userinterfaces exist. In one embodiment, user interface 114 is a graphicaluser interface. A graphical user interface (GUI) is a type of userinterface that allows users to interact with electronic devices, such asa computer keyboard and mouse, through graphical icons and visualindicators, such as secondary notation, as opposed to text-basedinterfaces, typed command labels, or text navigation. The actions inGUIs are often performed through direct manipulation of the graphicalelements. A user of client device 110 can utilize user interface 114 toperform software development tasks on base source code 122 throughapplication software 112. Additionally, user interface 114 may sendrequests through application software 112 to initiate software testingoptimization program 200. User interface 114 may also display receivedinformation from application software 112, base source code 122, andsoftware testing optimization program 200.

Server 120 may be any electronic device or computing system capable ofprocessing program instructions and receiving and sending data. In someembodiments, server 120 may be a laptop computer, a tablet computer, anetbook computer, a PC, a desktop computer, a PDA, a smart phone, or anyprogrammable device capable of communication with client device 110 overnetwork 130. In other embodiments, server 120 may represent a servercomputing system utilizing multiple computers as a server system, suchas in a cloud computing environment. Server 120 includes base sourcecode 122, revised base source code 124, software test results 126, andsoftware testing optimization program 200. Server 120 may includecomponents, as depicted and described in further detail, with respect toFIG. 4.

Base source code 122 and revised base source code 124 are softwareprogram files undergoing software development, which are subject torevision control. Base source code 122 includes the initial source codeassociated with a software program, software application, or multiplesoftware programs or applications written in a computer programminglanguage stored in revision control. Revised base source code 124 is anupdated revision of the original base source code 122, including one ormore revisions from the original source code file, stored in revisioncontrol with a unique identifier distinguishing the updated status. Aunique identifier (e.g., incremental serial numbers, lettering, namingconvention, etc.) is assigned to a revision of software once updated, todistinguish the revision and subsequent revisions of software apart. Forexample, a user of client device 110 utilizes application software 112to make a revision to base source code 122, which creates revised basesource code 124. The number of revisions of source code are not limitedto base source code 122 and revised source code 124, additionalrevisions of the source code may exist or be added that are notcurrently shown in FIG. 1. In the depicted embodiment, base source code122 and revised base source code 124 are stored on server 120. Inanother embodiment, base source code 122 and revised base source code124 may be stored on client device 110. In some other embodiment, basesource code 122 and revised base source code 124 may be stored in adatabase or on another storage device, not shown, accessible overnetwork 130.

Software test results 126 is a historical file including previousfailure information regarding base source code 122 and related failureswhich may occur in subsequent revisions (e.g., revised base source code124). As base source code 122 is modified and tested (e.g., updated torevised base source code 124), the information regarding the outcome ofthe tests is stored and updated for further use by software testingoptimization program 200. Software test results 126 may be implementedwith any type of storage device capable of storing data which may beaccessed and utilized by software testing optimization program 200. Inthe depicted embodiment, software test results 126 reside on server 120.In another embodiment, software test results 126 may reside on clientdevice 110. In some other embodiment, software test results 126 mayreside on another server or another computing device connected overnetwork 130, provided software test results 126 are accessible tosoftware testing optimization program 200.

Software testing optimization program 200 is a software program forintelligent software testing. Software testing optimization program 200analyzes the source code of a program, and implements a series ofiterative testing and re-evaluation of the software based on returnedresults, to allow for modifications to be made to the testing topotentially reduce the time and resources needed to test source code andlocate errors. Software testing optimization program 200 may beinitiated at any point, but may be more useful when initiated inresponse to receipt of software checked into revision control or when afailure is received during testing. In the depicted embodiment, softwaretesting optimization program 200 may be initiated by a user through userinterface 114 and application software 112. In another embodiment,software testing optimization program 200 may be initiated by anothersoftware testing application or program.

Network 130 may be a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN)such as the Internet, a wireless local area network (WLAN), anycombination thereof, or any combination of connections and protocolsthat will support communications between client device 110, othercomputing devices, and servers (not shown), in accordance withembodiments of the inventions. Network 130 may include wired, wireless,or fiber optic connections.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart depicting operational steps of software testingoptimization program 200, a program for optimizing the testing ofsoftware, and to rapidly identify the source of a failure in thesoftware, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

Prior to initiating software testing optimization program 200, basesource code 122 is checked out of revision control one or more times andmodifications are incorporated through application software 112. Basesource code 122 is then checked back into revision control, creating anew revision of base source code 122, which is referred to as revisedbase source code 124. For example, the checked in revisions build off ofthe previous revision of the source and are assigned unique identifiersto maintain multiple revisions of source code, allowing a return to aprevious revision of source code, if necessary. In one instance, priortesting of revised base source code 124 has not been performed and thestatus (e.g., pass or fail) is unknown. Alternatively, testing may havebeen performed on revised base source code 124 and a failure resulted,but the location of the failure within the revisions (e.g., current andprevious revisions) is not known.

In step 202, software testing optimization program 200 determinesmodifications between base source code 122 and revised base source code124. The modifications are determined differences between two revisionsof source code, and can be categorized by type (e.g., added, changed,and deleted lines of source code). Software testing optimization program200 utilizes a data comparison tool (e.g., diff utility, command lineutility, etc.) to determine the modifications between the two files(e.g., base source code 122 and revised source code 124). Specific tothe revision of source code that software testing optimization program200 performs the data comparison on, software testing optimizationprogram 200 stores the total number of modifications by type. Forexample, when software testing optimization program 200 compares revisedbase source code 124 to base source code 122, software testingoptimization program 200 stores the determined results for revised basesource code 124, consisting of ten added, five changed, and two deletedlines of source code.

In step 204, software testing optimization program 200 calculates theerror prone level. The error prone level is a dynamically updating valuebased on historical data from when failures occur in base source code122 and subsequent revisions (e.g., revised base source code 124). Theerror prone level provides an indication of the future likelihood of afailure occurring. For example, a high error prone level indicates anincreased chance of a failure, and conversely a low error prone levelnumber indicates a decreased chance of failure. In one embodiment,software testing optimization program 200 calculates the error pronelevel for functions within base source code 122 through incrementalcounters. In another embodiment, software testing optimization program200 calculates the error prone level as a weighted value (e.g.,additional criteria such a complexity, criticality, software dependency,etc. may be utilized with an incremental counter to calculate a value).Once an error prone level is calculated, software testing optimizationprogram 200 stores the value in software test results 126. As subsequentrevisions of base source code 122 (e.g., revised base source code 124)are created, committed, and built and/or tested, software testingoptimization program 200 re-calculates the error prone level withrespect to the previous results stored in software test results 126, andstores an updated error prone level.

For example, base source code 122 with functions “get time” and “getdate” is initially built (e.g., conversion of source code to anexecutable file to be run on a computer) and tested, with a failureoccurring in “get date.” Software testing optimization program 200increases the failure counter for “get date” from “0” to “1,” and thefailure counter for “get time” remains at “0” (e.g., failure was notlogged). Software testing optimization program 200 then stores the valueof the failure counters as the error prone levels for “get date” and“get time” in software test results 126 separately. Due to the failure,modifications are then made to base source code 122 through revisioncontrol for “get time” and “get date,” and when committed, becomesrevised source code 124. Revised source code 124 is built and tested,with another failure occurring in “get date.” Software testingoptimization program 200 utilizes the previous error prone levels for“get time” and “get date” as part of the new calculation, and increasesthe failure counter for “get date” from a “1” to a “2” and the failurecounter for “get time” remains “0.”

In step 206, software testing optimization program 200 calculates ascore for revised base source code 124 based on the source codemodifications and the error prone levels. Software testing optimizationprogram 200 includes a set of predetermined weights, providing anadjustment for the variables included in the scoring calculation whenapplied (e.g., added, changed, and deleted code, and error pronelevels). For example the predetermined weights assigned may be “0.30”for added lines of code, “0.25” for changed lines of code, “0.20” fordeleted lines of code, and “0.05” for error prone levels. Softwaretesting optimization program 200 then calculates an overall score bymultiplying the total number of the indicated variable (e.g., number oflines of source code, error prone value) by the correspondingpredetermined weight and adds the results together. Continuing theexample, utilizing “10” added lines multiplied by “0.30” weight, “5”changed lines multiplied by “0.25”, “2” deleted lines multiplied by“0.20”, and a “2” error prone level multiplied by “0.05.” The calculatedscore for revised base source code 124 would be a value of “4.75.” Asadditional revisions are made to revised base source code 124 throughrevision control, software testing optimization program 200 calculates ascore to coincide with the additional revisions.

In step 208, software testing optimization program 200 partitions therevisions between base source code 122 and revised base source code 124into critical and trivial revisions. As noted in step 206, softwaretesting optimization program 200 calculates a score for whenever arevision is made. The magnitude of the determined score varies dependingon the types of changes made. For example a revision with a high numberof added and changed lines of source code may be more prone to failures,which is reflected by a high score (e.g., a critical revision). Incomparison, a revision with only a few deleted lines of source code isless likely to include an error and therefore has a low associated score(e.g., a trivial revision). Software testing optimization program 200applies a predetermined threshold percentage to the highest revisionscore (of the revision scores calculated in step 206) to determine apercentage highest revision score to utilize as a threshold. Softwaretesting optimization program 200 then sets the calculated percentagehighest revision score value as the threshold and separates therevisions into critical and trivial revisions. Software testingoptimization program 200 determines the critical revisions to be one ormore of the overall revisions where the score of the individualrevision(s) are equal to or greater than the threshold. Software testingoptimization program 200 determines the trivial revisions to be the oneor more revisions where the score of the individual revision(s) are lessthan the threshold.

For example, FIG. 3A depicts applied software testing optimization 300,which includes ten revisions between base source code 122 and revisedbase source code 124, as depicted by revision A 302 (score=74), revisionB 304 (score=45), revision C 306 (score=40), revision D 308 (score=37),revision E 310 (score=41), revision F 312 (score=10), revision G 314(score=65), revision H 316 (score=23), revision I 318 (score=18),revision J 320 (score=59). The highest revision score (of the revisionscores determined in step 206) is 74 and is associated with revision A302. Software testing optimization program 200 includes a predeterminedthreshold percentage for critical revisions of eighty percent. Softwaretesting optimization program 200 applies the predetermined threshold ofeighty percent to the highest revision score of 74 to determine a scoreof 59. Therefore software testing optimization program 200 classifiescritical revisions as revisions with an overall score greater than orequal to 59, such as revision A 302 (score 74), revision G 314 (score65), and revision J 320 (score 59). Software testing optimizationprogram 200 classifies the remaining revisions as trivial revisions(e.g., all scores less than 59) as depicted within trivial revision box322 and trivial revision box 324.

In step 210, software testing optimization program 200, selects andtests a critical revision. For example, in applied software testingoptimization 300, the revisions are shown from right (e.g., newest, morerecent revision) to left (e.g., oldest revision). In one embodiment,regardless of the score of the critical revisions, software testingoptimization program 200 selects the most recent critical revision totest first. Upon completion of the test, software testing optimizationprogram 200 receives the results of the testing (e.g., pass or fail).For example, the newest revision is revision J 320 as noted by criticalrevision selector 326 (i.e., downward arrow with 1^(st) notation).Software testing optimization program 200 then may perform a variety oftests (e.g., build verification testing, unit test, integration testing,etc.) on revision J 320 and receives results. In subsequent iterationsdue to failures, software testing optimization program 200 continuesselecting and testing the next most recent critical revision in a rightto left manner. For example in a second iteration, after the failure ofrevision J 320, software testing optimization program 200 would selectand test revision G 314, as noted by critical revision selector 328(i.e., downward arrow with 2^(nd) notation). If revision G 314 alsofailed, then software testing optimization program 200 would select andtest revision A 302 third, as noted by critical revision selector 330(i.e., downward arrow with 3^(rd) notation).

In decision 212, software testing optimization program 200 determineswhether the critical revision tests passed. Software testingoptimization program 200 reviews the results of the tests to thecritical revision (selected in step 210) with regard to status (e.g.,pass or failure). If software testing optimization program 200determines the critical revision test passed (decision 212, yes branch),then software testing optimization program 200 determines whethertrivial revisions exist to test with respect to the last tested criticalrevision (decision 216). Software testing optimization program 200determines trivial revisions exist by identifying trivial revisionswithin the overall revisions scored, with respect to the last testedcritical revision results. If software testing optimization program 200determines the critical revision test failed (decision 212, no branch),then software testing optimization program 200 determines whetheradditional critical revisions exist to test (decision 214).

In decision 214, software testing optimization program 200 determineswhether additional critical revisions exist to test. Software testingoptimization program 200 excludes previously tested critical revisionsfrom the identified critical revisions remaining to be tested (e.g.,excludes critical revisions previously selected and tested in step 210).Software testing optimization program 200 continues checking for acritical revision until either a pass is received (decision 212, yesbranch) or no additional critical revisions exist to test (e.g., nountested critical revisions remain). If software testing optimizationprogram 200 determines additional critical revisions exist to test(decision 214, yes branch), then software testing optimization program200 selects and tests the next most recent critical revisions (step210). If software testing optimization program 200 determines noadditional critical revisions exist to test (decision 214, no branch),then software testing optimization program 200 determines whethertrivial revisions exist to test (decision 216).

In decision 216, software testing optimization program 200 determineswhether trivial revisions exist to test with respect to the last testedcritical revision. Software testing optimization program 200 determinesa sample space of trivial revisions defined by the critical revisionsand the associated test results. In one embodiment, software testingoptimization program 200 selects a sample space defined by two criticalrevisions, which occurs when the first critical revision test fails andthe second critical revision passes. Software testing optimizationprogram 200 selects the first trivial revision made immediately afterthe passing critical revision (e.g., immediately to the right in appliedsoftware testing optimization 300) through the last trivial revisionmade immediately prior to the failing critical revision (e.g.,immediately to the left in applied software testing optimization 300) todefine the boundaries of a sample space. For example in applied softwaretesting optimization 300, revision J 320 initially fails, and thetesting of the previous critical revision, revision G 314 passes.Software testing optimization program 200 identifies the two trivialrevisions noted within trivial revision box 324 as revision H 316 andrevision I 318 as the sample space.

In another embodiment, when the first critical revision tested passes,software testing optimization program 200 selects a sample space to theright of the critical revisions (e.g., selects all trivial revisionsmore recent than the passing critical revision) when trivial revisionsare present. For example in applied software testing optimization 300,revision J 320 passed, and software testing optimization program 200determines whether trivial revisions exist to the right of revision J320. In the example however, no revisions exist that are newer thanrevision J 320, therefore the sample space is empty (e.g., no trivialrevisions for further testing). In some other embodiment, the criticalrevision fails and no additional critical revisions exist to test. Whentrivial revisions are present, software testing optimization program 200selects trivial revisions to the left of the critical revisions as thesample space (e.g., selects trivial revisions older than the failingcritical revision). For example in applied software testing optimization300, if all three critical revisions failed (e.g., revision J 320,revision G 314, and revision A 302), the latest tested critical revisionwould be revision A 302. Software testing optimization program 200determines whether trivial revisions exist to the left of revision A302. In the depicted example, no trivial revisions exist that are olderthan revision A 302 for software testing optimization program 200 toutilize for further testing.

If software testing optimization program 200 determines no trivialrevisions exist to test (decision 216, no branch), then software testingoptimization program 200 displays the results (step 228). For example inapplied software testing optimization 300 revision J 320 passes,software optimization program 200 determines no trivial revisions existto the right of revision J 320, and displays results indicating revisionJ 320 passed. If software testing optimization program 200 determinestrivial revisions exist to test (decision 216, yes branch), thensoftware testing optimization program 200 determines and tests themiddle trivial revision from the selected sample space (step 218).

In step 218, software testing optimization program 200 determines andtests the middle trivial revision of the selected sample space. Softwaretesting optimization program 200 utilizes mathematical calculations andfunctions to determine the middle trivial revision of the selectedsample space (e.g., calculates a middle value based on the total numberof trivial revisions). Software testing optimization program 200 selectsthe trivial revision corresponding to the calculated middle value movingthrough the trivial revisions from right to left (e.g., most recenttrivial revision is counted as one, next most recent trivial revision iscounted as two, etc.). For example FIG. 3B depicts sample space 325, asthe five trivial revisions depicted within trivial revisions box 322(e.g., revision B 304 through revision F 312). Software testingoptimization program 200 calculates the middle value to be three, andselects revision D 308 as the middle trivial revision, as noted bymiddle trivial revision indicator 332. Software testing optimizationprogram 200 then tests the selected middle trivial revision (e.g.,revision D 308) utilizing predetermined tests. In subsequent iterationsof software testing optimization program 200, software testingoptimization program 200 reduces the selected sample space, and softwaretesting optimization program 200 determines and tests a new middletrivial revision.

In decision 220, software testing optimization program 200 determineswhether the middle trivial revision passed. If software testingoptimization program 200 determines the middle trivial revision testpassed (decision 220, yes branch), then software testing optimizationprogram 200 determines a reduced sample space based on a passing result(step 224). If software testing optimization program 200 determines themiddle trivial revision test fails (decision 220, no branch), thensoftware testing optimization program 200 determines a reduced samplespace based on a failure (step 222).

In step 222, software testing optimization program 200 determines areduced sample space based on a failure. Software testing optimizationprogram 200 excludes the trivial revisions more recent that the currenttrivial revision from the sample space. Software testing optimizationprogram 200 is unable to conclusively determine whether the failureoccurred within or prior to the current trivial middle revision withoutperforming additional testing. Therefore software testing optimizationprogram 200 selects the remaining trivial revisions made prior to thefailure (e.g., older revisions) in addition to the failed middle trivialrevision as part of a reduced sample space. Software testingoptimization program 200 therefore excludes revisions occurring afterthe middle trivial revision (e.g., more recent revisions) from thesample space as the failure is inherited by subsequent revisions (e.g.,new revisions are created based on the prior revisions). For exampleFIG. 3C depicts failure reduced sample space 350, revision D 308 fails,therefore software testing optimization program 200 excludes revision E310 and revision F 312 from the reduced sample space. Software testingoptimization program 200 reduces the sample space and selects remainingtrivial revisions, revision B 304, revision C 306, and revision D 308,as shown within reduced sample space box 334 for further testing.

In step 224, software testing optimization program 200 determines areduced sample space based on a passing result. Software testingoptimization program 200 excludes the middle and older trivial revisionsfrom the sample space. As the middle trivial revision passed, softwaretesting optimization program 200 determines previous revisions wouldalso pass testing (e.g., previous modifications made are incorporatedand tested as part of the middle trivial revision). Software testingoptimization program 200 therefore determines the error resulting in thefailure (in decision step 212) was introduced in a revision made afterthe tested middle trivial revision. Software testing optimizationprogram 200 selects only the trivial revisions that are more recent(e.g., newer, to the right of) than the passing critical revision as thereduced sample space. For example FIG. 3D depicts passing reduced samplespace 375, revision D 308 passes, software testing optimization program200 excludes revision B 304, revision C 306, and revision D 308 from thereduced sample space. Software testing optimization program 200 reducesthe sample space and selects remaining trivial revisions, revision E 310and F 312 as shown within reduced sample space 336 for further testing.

In decision 226, software testing optimization program 200 determineswhether the sample space is empty. Software testing optimization program200 considers the sample space to be empty when the reduced sample space(determined in step 224) does not include any additional trivialrevisions to test. In one embodiment, the sample space will no longerinclude trivial revisions (e.g., software testing optimization program200 discarded trivial revisions though iterative passing tests,indicating the failure occurs within the critical revision). In anotherembodiment software testing optimization program 200 may include asingle tested failing trivial revision. As the failing trivial revisionis the only remaining trivial revision, software testing optimizationprogram 200 sets the sample space to empty (e.g., no additional trivialrevisions remain that are untested, therefore the failure in includedwithin the remaining trivial revision).

If software testing optimization program 200 determines the sample spaceis empty (decision 226, yes branch), then software testing optimizationprogram 200 displays the results (step 228). If software testingoptimization program 200 determines the sample space is not empty(decision 226, no branch), then software testing optimization program200 determines and tests the middle trivial revision of the selectedsample space (step 218). Software testing optimization program 200continues to perform steps 218 through decision 226 until the samplespace is empty and the failure is identified.

In step 228, software optimization program 200 displays the results.Software testing optimization program 200 may display a failure ofrevised base code 124 and identifies the specific trivial or criticalrevision that includes the error. For example, software testingoptimization program 200 displays a trivial revision as including theerror when the reduced sample space only includes one trivial revision(e.g., the failing trivial revision). However, software testingoptimization program 200 displays a critical revision as including theerror, when the reduced sample space is empty (e.g., all of the trivialrevisions passed). Alternatively, software testing optimization program200 may display a passing status of revised base code 124 (e.g., nofailures were found). In one embodiment, software testing optimizationprogram 200 may display results directly through application software112 for viewing through user interface 114. In another embodiment,software testing optimization may store test results in a file on server120 accessible through user interface 114.

FIG. 4 depicts a block diagram of components of software developmentenvironment 400 which is representative of software developmentenvironment 100 in accordance with an illustrative embodiment of thepresent invention. It should be appreciated that FIG. 4 provides only anillustration of one implementation and does not imply any limitationswith regard to the environments in which different embodiments may beimplemented. Many modifications to the depicted environment may be made.

Software development environment 400 includes communications fabric 402,which provides communications between computer processor(s) 404, memory406, persistent storage 408, communications unit 410, and input/output(I/O) interface(s) 412. Communications fabric 402 can be implementedwith any architecture designed for passing data and/or controlinformation between processors (such as microprocessors, communicationsand network processors, etc.), system memory, peripheral devices, andany other hardware components within a system. For example,communications fabric 402 can be implemented with one or more buses.

Memory 406 and persistent storage 408 are computer readable storagemedia. In this embodiment, memory 406 includes random access memory(RAM) 414 and cache memory 416. In general, memory 406 can include anysuitable volatile or non-volatile computer readable storage media.

Application software 112, user interface 114, base source code 122,revised base source code 124, software test results database, andsoftware testing optimization program 200 are stored in persistentstorage 408 for execution and/or access by one or more of the respectivecomputer processors 404 via one or more memories of memory 406. In thisembodiment, persistent storage 408 includes a magnetic hard disk drive.Alternatively, or in addition to a magnetic hard disk drive, persistentstorage 408 can include a solid state hard drive, a semiconductorstorage device, read-only memory (ROM), erasable programmable read-onlymemory (EPROM), flash memory, or any other computer readable storagemedia that is capable of storing program instructions or digitalinformation.

The media used by persistent storage 408 may also be removable. Forexample, a removable hard drive may be used for persistent storage 408.Other examples include optical and magnetic disks, thumb drives, andsmart cards that are inserted into a drive for transfer onto anothercomputer readable storage medium that is also part of persistent storage408.

Communications unit 410, in these examples, provides for communicationswith other data processing systems or devices, including resources ofenterprise grid and client devices. In these examples, communicationsunit 410 includes one or more network interface cards. Communicationsunit 410 may provide communications through the use of either or bothphysical and wireless communications links. Application software 112,user interface 114, base source code 122, revised base source code 124,software test results database, and software testing optimizationprogram 200 may be downloaded to persistent storage 408 throughcommunications unit 410.

I/O interface(s) 412 allows for input and output of data with otherdevices that may be connected to software development environment 400.For example, I/O interface 412 may provide a connection to externaldevices 418 such as a keyboard, keypad, a touch screen, and/or someother suitable input device. External devices 418 can also includeportable computer readable storage media such as, for example, thumbdrives, portable optical or magnetic disks, and memory cards. Softwareand data used to practice embodiments of the present invention, e.g.,Application software 112, user interface 114, base source code 122,revised base source code 124, software test results database, andsoftware testing optimization program 200, can be stored on suchportable computer readable storage media and can be loaded ontopersistent storage 408 via I/O interface(s) 412. I/O interface(s) 412also connect to a display 420.

Display 420 provides a mechanism to display data to a user and may be,for example, a computer monitor.

The programs described herein are identified based upon the applicationfor which they are implemented in a specific embodiment of theinvention. However, it should be appreciated that any particular programnomenclature herein is used merely for convenience, and thus theinvention should not be limited to use solely in any specificapplication identified and/or implied by such nomenclature.

The present invention may be a system, a method, and/or a computerprogram product. The computer program product may include a computerreadable storage medium (or media) having computer readable programinstructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects of thepresent invention.

The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible device that canretain and store instructions for use by an instruction executiondevice. The computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but isnot limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device,an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, asemiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. A non-exhaustive list of more specific examples of thecomputer readable storage medium includes the following: a portablecomputer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), aread-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROMor Flash memory), a static random access memory (SRAM), a portablecompact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD),a memory stick, a floppy disk, a mechanically encoded device such aspunch-cards or raised structures in a groove having instructionsrecorded thereon, and any suitable combination of the foregoing. Acomputer readable storage medium, as used herein, is not to be construedas being transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freelypropagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagatingthrough a waveguide or other transmission media (e.g., light pulsespassing through a fiber-optic cable), or electrical signals transmittedthrough a wire.

Computer readable program instructions described herein can bedownloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a computerreadable storage medium or to an external computer or external storagedevice via a network, for example, the Internet, a local area network, awide area network and/or a wireless network. The network may comprisecopper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wirelesstransmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers and/oredge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in eachcomputing/processing device receives computer readable programinstructions from the network and forwards the computer readable programinstructions for storage in a computer readable storage medium withinthe respective computing/processing device.

Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations ofthe present invention may be assembler instructions,instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine instructions,machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions,state-setting data, or either source code or object code written in anycombination of one or more programming languages, including an objectoriented programming language such as Smalltalk, C++ or the like, andconventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C”programming language or similar programming languages. The computerreadable program instructions may execute entirely on the user'scomputer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone softwarepackage, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computeror entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario,the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through anytype of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide areanetwork (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer(for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).In some embodiments, electronic circuitry including, for example,programmable logic circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), orprogrammable logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readableprogram instructions by utilizing state information of the computerreadable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuitry,in order to perform aspects of the present invention.

Aspects of the present invention are described herein with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer readable program instructions.

These computer readable program instructions may be provided to aprocessor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, orother programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, suchthat the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computeror other programmable data processing apparatus, create means forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks. These computer readable program instructionsmay also be stored in a computer readable storage medium that can directa computer, a programmable data processing apparatus, and/or otherdevices to function in a particular manner, such that the computerreadable storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises anarticle of manufacture including instructions which implement aspects ofthe function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram blockor blocks.

The computer readable program instructions may also be loaded onto acomputer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other deviceto cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer,other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computerimplemented process, such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer, other programmable apparatus, or other device implement thefunctions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block orblocks.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods, and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof instructions, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). In some alternativeimplementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of theorder noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in successionmay, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks maysometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon thefunctionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of theblock diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocksin the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implementedby special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specifiedfunctions or acts or carry out combinations of special purpose hardwareand computer instructions.

The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present inventionhave been presented for purposes of illustration, but are not intendedto be exhaustive or limited to the embodiments disclosed. Manymodifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skillin the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention.The terminology used herein was chosen to best explain the principles ofthe embodiment, the practical application or technical improvement overtechnologies found in the marketplace, or to enable others of ordinaryskill in the art to understand the embodiments disclosed herein.

1. A method for testing software, the method comprising: receiving, byone or more computer processors, a series of two or more revisions to aset of software code; identifying, by one or more computer processors, afirst revision and a second revision within the series of two or morerevisions, wherein the first revision occurs immediately prior to thesecond revision; identifying, by one or more computer processors, anumber of modifications between the first revision and the secondrevision based on one or more of: a number of added lines of sourcecode, a number of changed lines of source code, and a number of deletedlines of source code; retrieving, by one or more computer processors,one or more historical data values, wherein the one or more historicaldata values tracks a number of times a failure occurs with theidentified modifications for the series of two or more revisions;calculating, by one or more computer processors, one or more weightedvalues by applying predetermined weights to the one or more retrievedhistorical data values and the identified modifications for the seriesof two or more revisions; calculating, by one or more computerprocessors, overall revision scores for revisions included in the seriesof two or more revisions based on the one or more calculated weightedvalues; determining, by one or more computer processors, a highestoverall revision score from the calculated overall revision scores;calculating, by one or more computer processors, a threshold as apercentage of the highest overall revision score; identifying, by one ormore computer processors, one or more revisions from the series of twoor more revisions with corresponding determined overall revision scoresequal to or greater than the calculated threshold to be criticalrevisions; identifying, by one or more computer processors, one or morerevisions from the series of two or more revisions with correspondingdetermined overall revision scores less than the calculated threshold tobe trivial revisions; identifying, by one or more computer processors,one or more critical revisions; determining, by one or more computerprocessors, a critical revision from the identified one or more criticalrevisions; testing, by one or more computer processors, the determinedcritical revision; determining, by one or more computer processors,whether the tested critical revision passed; responsive to determiningthe tested critical revision failed; determining, by one or moreprocessors, whether a previous untested critical revision remains in theidentified one or more critical revisions; identifying, by one or morecomputer processors, the previous untested critical revision respectiveto the tested critical revision; and testing, by one or more computerprocessors, the identified previous untested critical revision. 2.(canceled)
 3. (canceled)
 4. (canceled)
 5. (canceled)
 6. The method ofclaim 1, further comprising: determining by one or more computerprocessors, a sample space wherein the sample space comprises one of:one or more trivial revisions between a passing critical revision and afailing critical revision in the series of two or more revisions; one ormore trivial revisions between a failing critical revision and an oldesttrivial revision in the series of two or more revisions; and one or moretrivial revisions between a passing critical revision and a most recenttrivial revision in the series of two or more revisions.
 7. The methodof claim 6, further comprising: determining, by one or more computerprocessors, whether the determined sample space includes one or moretrivial revisions; responsive to determining that the determined samplespace includes one or more trivial revisions, identifying, by one ormore computer processors, a middle trivial revision from the determinedsample space; testing, by one or more computer processors, theidentified middle trivial revision; and determining, by one or morecomputer processors, whether the tested middle trivial revision passed.8. The method of claim 7, further comprising: responsive to determiningthe tested middle trivial revision failed, determining, by one or morecomputer processors, a reduced sample space, wherein the reduced samplespace includes the tested middle trivial revisions and trivial revisionsthat occur prior to the tested middle trivial revision; determining, byone or more computer processors, whether the reduced sample space isempty; and responsive to determining the reduced sample space is notempty, determining, by one or more computer processors, another middletrivial revision to test.
 9. The method of claim 7, further comprising:responsive to determining the tested middle trivial revision passed,determining by one or more computer processors a reduced sample spacewherein the reduced sample space includes trivial revisions that occurafter the tested middle trivial revision; determining, by one or morecomputer processors, whether the reduced sample space is empty; andresponsive to determining the reduced sample space is not empty,determining, by one or more computer processors, another middle trivialrevision to test.